Can You Sue a Semi-Trailer Manufacturer for Failing to Install Side Underride Guards After a Fatal Crash?
While federal safety regulations have mandated rear impact guards ("ICC bumpers") on commercial semi-trailers for decades, the vast expanse between a tractor's rear axles and the trailer's landing gear—often stretching over 30 feet—remains completely open and unprotected on the vast majority of American trailers. When a passenger vehicle impacts the side of a turning or crossing commercial tractor-trailer, the car's front crush zone passes cleanly beneath the high trailer deck. The steel bed of the trailer directly penetrates the vehicle's windshield and passenger cabin, crushing occupants and shearing off vehicle roof pillars. Known as a side underride collision, these catastrophic events have a fatality rate significantly higher than standard motor vehicle accidents.
For years, trailer manufacturers shielded themselves from lawsuits by arguing that because the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) had not yet federally mandated side underride guards, their trailers were legally non-defective. Today, that defense is collapsing. Answering whether you can sue a semi-trailer manufacturer for failing to install side underride guards after a fatal crash requires navigating complex state product liability laws, design defect theories, and corporate safety cost-benefit analyses.
Under modern strict product liability law, meeting minimum federal safety standards does not automatically inoculate a manufacturer against defect claims. If proven that a cost-effective, commercially available, and mechanically feasible alternative design (such as steel or composite side underride guards) would have prevented the cabin intrusion without impairing trailer utility, the manufacturer can be held liable for design defect.
Overcoming the Federal Preemption Defense in Underride Litigation
In side underride litigation, trailer OEMs (such as Wabash, Great Dane, Utility, or Hyundai Translead) routinely file motions to dismiss based on federal preemption. Experienced trial attorneys dismantle this defense through rigorous technical evidence:
The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) and independent engineering firms have conducted extensive 35-40 mph side underride crash tests demonstrating that side guards reliably deflect cars and allow seatbelts and airbags to function as engineered. Subpoenaed internal engineering memos often reveal manufacturers knew their trailers were lethal death traps yet lobbied against regulatory safety mandates to preserve profit margins.
A side underride lawsuit rarely targets the manufacturer alone. The plaintiff simultaneously sues the commercial motor carrier for the driver's operational negligence (such as blocking traffic during an illegal turn or improper merge) while bringing a strict product liability claim against the trailer builder, maximizing available insurance policy limits and corporate assets.
Many fleets equip trailers with plastic or lightweight fiberglass aerodynamic side skirts to improve fuel efficiency. When struck, these flimsy panels provide zero structural resistance. Plaintiffs prove that reinforcing these aerodynamic skirts into structural side-impact barriers represents a known, feasible technology that the manufacturer chose to omit.
Preserving Trailer Geometry and Laser Scan Telemetry
After a side underride collision, both the commercial trailer and passenger vehicle must be secured immediately. Forensic engineers perform 3D high-definition laser scanning to map the exact trajectory of underride penetration, mathematically proving that a side guard would have prevented passenger compartment intrusion.